CVE-2024-35973 : Detail

CVE-2024-35973

5.5
/
Medium
0.05%V4
Local
2024-05-20
09h42 +00:00
2024-12-19
08h59 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

geneve: fix header validation in geneve[6]_xmit_skb

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: geneve: fix header validation in geneve[6]_xmit_skb syzbot is able to trigger an uninit-value in geneve_xmit() [1] Problem : While most ip tunnel helpers (like ip_tunnel_get_dsfield()) uses skb_protocol(skb, true), pskb_inet_may_pull() is only using skb->protocol. If anything else than ETH_P_IPV6 or ETH_P_IP is found in skb->protocol, pskb_inet_may_pull() does nothing at all. If a vlan tag was provided by the caller (af_packet in the syzbot case), the network header might not point to the correct location, and skb linear part could be smaller than expected. Add skb_vlan_inet_prepare() to perform a complete mac validation. Use this in geneve for the moment, I suspect we need to adopt this more broadly. v4 - Jakub reported v3 broke l2_tos_ttl_inherit.sh selftest - Only call __vlan_get_protocol() for vlan types. v2,v3 - Addressed Sabrina comments on v1 and v2 [1] BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in geneve_xmit_skb drivers/net/geneve.c:910 [inline] BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in geneve_xmit+0x302d/0x5420 drivers/net/geneve.c:1030 geneve_xmit_skb drivers/net/geneve.c:910 [inline] geneve_xmit+0x302d/0x5420 drivers/net/geneve.c:1030 __netdev_start_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:4903 [inline] netdev_start_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:4917 [inline] xmit_one net/core/dev.c:3531 [inline] dev_hard_start_xmit+0x247/0xa20 net/core/dev.c:3547 __dev_queue_xmit+0x348d/0x52c0 net/core/dev.c:4335 dev_queue_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:3091 [inline] packet_xmit+0x9c/0x6c0 net/packet/af_packet.c:276 packet_snd net/packet/af_packet.c:3081 [inline] packet_sendmsg+0x8bb0/0x9ef0 net/packet/af_packet.c:3113 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:730 [inline] __sock_sendmsg+0x30f/0x380 net/socket.c:745 __sys_sendto+0x685/0x830 net/socket.c:2191 __do_sys_sendto net/socket.c:2203 [inline] __se_sys_sendto net/socket.c:2199 [inline] __x64_sys_sendto+0x125/0x1d0 net/socket.c:2199 do_syscall_64+0xd5/0x1f0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6d/0x75 Uninit was created at: slab_post_alloc_hook mm/slub.c:3804 [inline] slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:3845 [inline] kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x613/0xc50 mm/slub.c:3888 kmalloc_reserve+0x13d/0x4a0 net/core/skbuff.c:577 __alloc_skb+0x35b/0x7a0 net/core/skbuff.c:668 alloc_skb include/linux/skbuff.h:1318 [inline] alloc_skb_with_frags+0xc8/0xbf0 net/core/skbuff.c:6504 sock_alloc_send_pskb+0xa81/0xbf0 net/core/sock.c:2795 packet_alloc_skb net/packet/af_packet.c:2930 [inline] packet_snd net/packet/af_packet.c:3024 [inline] packet_sendmsg+0x722d/0x9ef0 net/packet/af_packet.c:3113 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:730 [inline] __sock_sendmsg+0x30f/0x380 net/socket.c:745 __sys_sendto+0x685/0x830 net/socket.c:2191 __do_sys_sendto net/socket.c:2203 [inline] __se_sys_sendto net/socket.c:2199 [inline] __x64_sys_sendto+0x125/0x1d0 net/socket.c:2199 do_syscall_64+0xd5/0x1f0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6d/0x75 CPU: 0 PID: 5033 Comm: syz-executor346 Not tainted 6.9.0-rc1-syzkaller-00005-g928a87efa423 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 02/29/2024

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-908 Use of Uninitialized Resource
The product uses or accesses a resource that has not been initialized.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 5.5 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

None

There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.
EPSS First.org

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.19.191 To (excluding) 4.19.313

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.4.119 To (excluding) 5.4.275

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.10.37 To (excluding) 5.10.216

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11.21 To (excluding) 5.12

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.12.4 To (excluding) 5.15.156

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.87

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.28

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.8.7

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9

Configuraton 0

Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 10.0

References

The information presented on CVE Find originates from several carefully selected reference sources. CVE data is provided by MITRE Corporation and the National Vulnerability Database (NVD). The Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog is sourced from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), while EPSS scores come from FIRST.org. Additionally, data regarding software weaknesses (CWE) and common attack patterns (CAPEC) is maintained by MITRE Corporation, and information on hardware and software configurations (CPE) is provided by the NVD.